Eyewear

ABSTRACT

A lens holding system for eyeglass frames having a pliable body with a lens opening for engagement of a lens therein and a circumferential edges configured to engage with a lens aperture of an eyewear frame to hold the lens operatively positioned therein. A front surface portion extending from the pliable body contacts a front surface of the eyeglass frame and is formed with a width narrower than a rear surface portion extending from the pliable body which contacts a rear facing surface of the eyewear frame. Significant comfort and performance enhancement is provided using a metal alloy frame in combination with polymeric temples.

This application is a Continuation in Part Application to U.S. patentapplication Ser. No. 16/260,007 filed on Jan. 28, 2019 which claimspriority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/622,685filed on Jan. 26, 2018, both of which are incorporated herein in theirrespective entirety by this reference thereto.

BACKGROUND 1. Field of the Invention

The invention relates to eyewear such as sunglasses and eyeglasses. Moreparticularly, the disclosed device relates to a polymeric lens holderadapted to engage within the openings of a metal eyeglass frame on afirst edge and to operatively hold a lens within an opening on a secondedge, where the lens holder is formed with a front and rear facingportions having a ratio of width which enhances resistance to the heldlens from dismounting.

2. Prior Art

Eyewear, such as sunglasses, have been employed throughout the world fordecades for vision enhancement in bright sunlight as well as forprotection for the eyes in bright environments. Due to operativerequirements in blocking sunlight and glare at different times of theday, as well as for style choices, many users of sunglasses tend to ownseveral pairs for such varying reasons. One issue with the owning ofmultiple pairs of sunglasses is the significant cost of purchasing andmaintaining them. Another issue for users is the difficulty of managingand keeping sunglasses in an organized location. Sunglasses are used forlots of different activities such as golf, motorcycle riding day andnight, bicycle riding, running, driving a car, combat, or in a morerelaxing venue such as the beach. As a consequence, eyewear, such assunglasses, require users to make different lens choices for differentconditions of use, such as in lighting conditions where the lenses maydiffer for glare and time of day or when employed to protect the eyesfrom both glare and projectiles which might impact the eye, such asduring bike or motorcycle riding or combat.

In recent years, there has been a growing new development in eyewearframes where not only plastic material is employed for eyewear andsunglasses, but metal frames are also used. An example of such is thedevelopment and marketing of metal frames by GATORZ such as the patentedaluminum sunglass (U.S. Pat. No. 5,583,583 which is hereby incorporatedby reference). Metal frame products, such as that by GATORZ, areconventionally formed from aluminum of specific rigidity to withstandframe and lens impact from extreme sports and where the user needsimpact resistance due to their activity such as motorcycle or bikeriding at high speeds, or in combat

The success in the industry subsequent to the introduction of metalframes has caused such metal frames for eyewear to be introduced to themarket by many firms. A significant issue for firms manufacturing sucheyewear employing metal frames is that it is hard to mount the glass orplastic lenses within the openings provided for such in metal eyewearframes. Because such frames are formed of metal such as aluminum ortitanium, which is tempered for hardness, and therefore do not stretchor bend in the manner of plastic frames, engaging lenses within theopenings of the metallic frames is a significant issue. Where the metalforming the eyewear frames has a tempered hardness of for example 4,000series and up to 7,000 series, the rigidity of the formed frame rendersthe problem of an easy but secure mount of lenses therein, elusive atbest. Further, once mounted using a polymeric interface or lens holderwhich is sufficiently pliable to allow for lens engagement, the mountedlenses in many cases are subject to dismount upon impact by a projectileor where the temperature causes expansion of the metal frame without amatching expansion of the polymeric lens holder.

There have been other frame designs in the industry which use aluminumor titanium but only in a thin and less bulky configuration of theformed frame. For example, titanium frames made from rolled materials donot compare to frames that have been made from sheet or billet blockaluminum. The aluminum requires a mass area of metal to retain itsstrength and integrity.

As such, there is a continuing unmet need for a lens engagement systemwhich solves the conventional problems for the eyewear industry whichoccur where frames of metal such as aluminum for sunglasses are formedwith thin small grooves that make it difficult to take lenses in and outof the sunglass frames. This is because metal frames, such as those fromaluminum, are formed from 0.070 to 0.250 inch thick and a groove must becut in the metal to accept the V or U shape lens bevel. Since mostlenses are between 0.040 to 0.090 inch thick, such as sunglass lensesand nonprescription lenses, this leaves little area for lens engagement.The problem is exacerbated by prescription lenses, which can be muchthicker in certain areas making them a challenge to even engage to ametal frame.

Many aluminum sunglasses on the market today are made from 6061, 7075,5052 and other lower hardness alloys. Most manufacturers are forging,machining, or injecting these alloys to create the mass frame structureto withstand the abuse. One advantage to these frames, that they allhave in common, is they are lightweight which is a benefit of usingaluminum versus steel or other heavy metals. Further, steel or otherheavy metals lack the flexibility such an alloy provides and especiallyin sheet or billet type production glasses.

Some manufacturers will make aluminum sunglasses from sheet such as 6061or 7075 and machine them on a CNC. Some aluminum glasses are extrudedlike the LIQUID EYEWEAR patented product, but lens mounting issuesremain a problem such as having a lens that will easily snap in and outbut will not easily dismount upon impact to the lens during use whichcan cause injury to the user.

Other sunglasses on the market offer lens replacement by employingplastic frames and even provide videos depicting how easy it is toreplace a lens in a plastic frame. Consequently, plastic frames areconventionally perceived as much easier for the user to deal with sinceplastic frames will flex much easier than metal frames formed ofaluminum or titanium.

Conversely, most companies providing metallic frames such as formed fromaluminum or titanium require the customer to return the eyeglasses tothe factory for lens replacement. This is a significant issue where theuser has a changed lens prescription or just wants replacement lensesdue to lens damage. Because of the difficulty in removing old lenses andengaging replacement lenses in metal frames, some factories will disposeof the old eyewear frame and give the consumer a new frame with newlenses inserted, at significant cost in money to the factory andsignificant time delay for the user.

Many military servicemen and women, such as Navy Seals, prefer wearingmetal frame eyewear such as aluminum sunglasses because they arelightweight and knowing the lens is surrounded by aluminum such as 7075alloy which is used in jet fighter wings. The aluminum being bothcomfortable and lightweight makes them a preferred choice of eyewear.However, when a scratch occurs to the lenses or they need replacementfor other reasons, they usually have to buy another pair or rely on abackup pair which the factory then re-engages new lenses since the usercannot do so. Where softer polymeric interfaces have been used in thepast, which are sufficiently pliable to allow the user to disengage andre-engage new lenses to the metal frame, dismounting of the user-engagedlenses is an issue, especially upon an impact to the lenses.

The forgoing examples of related art as to the engagement of eyeglasslenses with eyeglass frames, especially metal frames, and limitationsrelated therewith, are intended to be illustrative and not exclusive,and they do not imply any limitations on the invention described andclaimed herein. Various limitations of the related art will becomeapparent to those skilled in the art upon a reading and understanding ofthe specification below and the accompanying drawings.

SUMMARY OF INVENTION

The device and method herein provides a solution to the shortcomings ofconventional mounting of glass and plastic lenses within eyeglass lensopenings in the thin material of eyeglass frames such as those made frommetal such as aluminum or titanium. The hybrid mode of the device hereinadditionally provides the user with more comfort when wearing theeyewear, especially where the frame is in a configuration where it istoo stiff and tends to cause a compressive engagement of the temples tothe head of the user. Employing a polymeric lens holder that interfacesbetween the side edge of the eyewear lens and the interior edges of thineyewear frames such as those made from metal, the device herein providesfor the easy engagement of lenses within metal eyeglass frames. Theinclusion of polymeric temples, in combination with metal frames formedin a thickness and metal material which in combination with the templesprovides a symbiotic fit to the user which is more comfortable theneither alone.

In addition to the provision of easy engagement and disengagement andreplacement of lenses within eyeglass frames, such as those made frommetal, the configuration of the lens holder herein, if formed in aconfiguration which significantly enhances resistance to lensdismounting from the frame, such as upon impact contacts with the lensesduring use. Such impacts can be, for example, caused by a large insectwhen the user is riding a bike or motorcycle or by projectiles whichmight be encountered in combat or training therefor.

This ease of installation, but resistance to dismounting upon impact tothe held lens, provides wearers of eyeglasses with the ability to changeor replace their own lenses when required. Further, by employing a lensholder configuration which resists the force of impacts to the mountedlenses, the lens holder device herein significantly enhances the safetyof the user of eyewear employing the lens holders herein, to prevent eyeinjury by preventing dismount of the lenses and contact to the eyes ofthe user of such dismounted lenses or the projectile that dismountedthem.

The lens holder herein shown and described, provides this enhancedresistance to dismounting by forming a front surface portion facing thearea in front of the eyeglass frame, which is smaller in width than thewidth of a rear surface portion on the opposite side of the frame whichis adjacent the face of the user. It was found during experimentationthat by forming the front surface portion in this shorter width, thatupon impact with the lens held by the lens holder, the front surfaceportion folds forward and also stretches, and then snaps back to anoriginal position. The shorter or narrower width of the front surfaceportion worked to increase dismount resistance in a range where thewidth W1 of the front surface portion was between 20 to 90 percent ofthe width W2 of the rear surface portion. While this range provided anenhanced resistance to dismounting of the held lens, a range of thewidth W1 of 30-80 percent of the width W2 worked somewhat better and arange of W1 of 40 to 70 percent of the width of W2 of the rear surfaceportion performed best and should be employed where the eyewear islikely to encounter higher speed projectiles.

It should be noted that forming the width of the front surface portionnarrower than that of the rear surface portion yielded an unexpectedoutcome, since originally it was thought that forming the front surfaceportion in a width equal to or wider than the width of the rear surfaceportion would enhance the stability of the held lens and resistance todismount on impact. However, forming the front surface portion in thisequal or larger width configuration than that of the rear surfaceportion unexpectedly caused the lenses to more easily dismount oncontact with projectiles hitting the lens. In further experimentation,it was found that the equal or larger width of the front surface portioncaused the force of the impact to be communicated to the front surfaceportion at full force without the stretching and momentary curling ofthe front surface portion occurring, resulting in the lens dismountingfrom the lens holder and frame. Counterintuitively, employing thenarrower width configuration of the front surface portion was found toform a shock absorber during impacts to the lens, such as a curlingforward of the front surface portion and slight stretching and movementof the lens holder within the frame aperture, and retainment of the lensin the holder and frame.

Additionally found to affect the shock absorbing ability of thepolymeric lens holders in the configuration with a narrower width frontsurface portion is the durometer of the polymeric material forming thelens holder on the D-scale range. Where the material has a shoredurometer which is was too soft, the shock absorption occurred, but insome cases the lens holder overstretched and did not prevent lensdismount on impact as well as that of harder durometer ranges. However,harder shore rating and durometer ranges made it harder to mount anddismount the lenses in the frame.

In experimentation it was found that a D-scale durometer of 40 shore wasas soft as might be acceptable to pass the ANSI-Z87.1-2015 testing. Anincrease to a durometer of 63 shore provided much more resistanceagainst lens dismount using the narrower front surface portion as did adurometer of 70 shore and then to 90 shore. However, while the materialin the higher durometer range worked well it as noted, made it harderfor a user to mount and dismount lenses.

As such, when forming the lens holder of a pliable polymeric materialsuch as TPEE which worked well especially during wide temperaturevariances, the preferred durometer of the material would be in a rangeon the D-scale between 40-90 shore. This range allowed for reasonablyeasy engagement and disengagement of surrounded lenses to the frame andprovided the enhanced resistance to projectile-caused dismounting wherethe lens holder is formed with the front surface portion having anarrower with than that of the rear surface portion. Where the eyewearis going to be used with the possibility of high speed projectile impactsuch as riding on a motorcycle or in combat or training, a D-scaledurometer between 60-70 shore was found to enhance dismountingresistance and allowing for easy user changing of lenses. This rangealso allowed the front surface portion to deform and act as a shockabsorber to impact force of projectiles against the lens and prevent alens dismount.

In all modes of the device herein, the lense holder will have anexterior edge in between the front surface portion and the rear surfaceportion of the lens holder, which forms an exterior circumferential edgeadapted to engage the interior circumference of a lens opening in aneyewear frame such as metallic frames. This exterior circumferentialedge can simply be the surface of the lens holder located in a gapbetween the front surface portion and the rear surface portion or it mayalso have a recess formed into the surface of the material within thegap for a more secure engagement to the lens opening in the frame ifrequired. On an opposite interior circumferential edge, a groove isformed therein which is adapted to engage with a lens circumference onthe exterior edge of the lens to be mounted.

In extensive testing, it was also found that with the frame holding thelenses is formed of metal, that a compressive contact of the templesextending from the metal frame could be a significant cause of userdiscomfort, and in some cases headaches. During experimentation it wasfound that the discomfort and headaches were apparently caused when themetal frame, be it curved as shown, or planar, when formed in athickness and/or of a metal alloy material, can lack sufficientflexibility to flex slightly when worn, to accommodate many facialstructures of users. For example users with a larger or wider head, werefound to have a force of contact of the temples extending from oppositeends of the metal eyeglass frame, which biased the temples under forceagainst the sides of their head. While this may seem like a productattribute which enhances the engagement to the head of the user toprevent accidental dismount, in fact an excessive compressive inwardcontact of the temples, caused headaches in some and skin irritation inothers.

In order to render the device more easily accommodating to a widernumber of users with varying head sizes, significant experimentation wasconducted to find a solution which couples a metal frame having theabove noted benefits when employed with the lens body holders herein,with polymeric temples. The combination of a frame formed of a metalhaving a hardness and shear strength when in a thin sheet, to preventdismounting of the lens holder body during flexing, but a modulus ofelasticity to allow for slight flex during use, with polymeric templesproviding for flex and light weight, combine to provide a symbioticrelation of the above positive attributes yielding the most comfortablefit for the widest variety of users with all sizes of heads and eyespacing. This is most important when the eyewear is being used byindividual users, but especially important where the eyewear is usedwith groups such as the military, to customize the lenses held in thelens openings of the frame by the flexible lense body, and still providea comfortable fit for short and long term use in challenging weather andtemperatures and field conditions.

There are literally hundreds of aluminum metal alloys in a high numberof tempered hardness and extensive testing of such was required to findthe most preferred metal alloy which provided a frame useable with usershaving widely varying head characteristics. It was important to find themost comfortable frame which would hold up to the rigors of use insports, and especially in combat, where the eyewear can be customizedfor each user as to the optic correction, while still providing animpact resistant and comfortable frame.

After many combinations of metal allow frames and differing polymerictemples, where failure of lens mounting occurred with some, anddiscomfort to users occurred with many others, a most preferred solutionwas found. By forming the metal frame in a narrow range of thickness, ofa metal allow material with sufficient elasticity, elongation percent,and shear strength, to allow deformation without fracture or a dismountof the lenses, in a combination with polymeric temples having adetermined Tensile E modulus and flexure during use, that the twocomponents combined in a symbiotic manner, yield the most comfortablefit to the widest number of users of differing head sizes and eyespacing.

Currently formation of the metal frame in thickness in a rangesubstantially between 0.075 to 0.085 inches, of a metal alloy of 6061aluminum with a T6 hardness is the most preferred alloy. While the 6061aluminum with a T5 will work, a T4 hardness was found too soft forstructural longevity, and liable to crack or fail and cause lensdismount. Also the metal frame maintained structural integrity in ahardness of T7-T9, but with each increase in tempered hardness,discomfort tended to increase as the potential for cracking around thelens apertures in the frame. A 7075 aluminum alloy tempered to a T6hardness was also found to provide for the flexure and deformationduring use to comfortably accommodate both small and large heads. Assuch, a metal alloy in a thickness between 0.060 to 0.25 inches, formedof a 6061 Aluminum alloy, or a 7075 aluminum alloy, with a temperedhardness between T4-T9 is preferred for the metal frame, with a temperedhardness of T6 being the most preferred. The best overall result wasprovided by the metal and allow frame in a thickness between 0.075 to0.090 inches with 0.080 inches in thickness yielding particularlypreferred comfort in combination with the polymeric temples while stillyielding good impact resistance and resistance to dismounting of lensesduring hard use such as sports or combat under both freezingtemperatures as well as desert temperatures.

The temples were likewise tested in many types of material from nylon topolyester to other polymeric materials having differing ranges ofthickness of the temples themselves. Tested materials included zylonite,acetate and cellulose acetate, polyamide, nylon, and polycarbonate. Ofthe many materials tested, TR90 GRILAMID nylon having a Tensile Emodulus of 1600 Mpa, or an equal substitute in this modulus, incombination with the metal allow frames in the above noted materials andconstruction, yielded the most comfortable eyewear which stayed on theheads of users. The temples formed in this material had a length ofbetween three to six inches extending from the hinged engagement to theallow frame. The best performing thickness of the formed temples of thenylon material were between 0.090 to 0.190 inches in thickness.

With respect to the above description, before explaining at least onepreferred embodiment of the herein disclosed shock absorbing useremployable lens holder in detail, it is to be understood that thedisclosed lens holder herein is not limited in its application to thedetails of construction and to the arrangement of the components in thefollowing description or illustrated in the drawings. The inventionherein described is capable of other embodiments and of being practicedand carried out in various ways which will be obvious to those skilledin the art. Also, it is to be understood that the phraseology andterminology employed herein are for the purpose of description andshould not be regarded as limiting.

As such, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the conceptionupon which this disclosure is based may readily be utilized as a basisfor designing of other structures, methods and systems for carrying outthe several purposes of the present disclosed lens holder. It isimportant, therefore, that the claims be regarded as including suchequivalent construction and methodology insofar as they do not departfrom the spirit and scope of the present invention.

The objects, features, and advantages of the present user employableshock absorbing lens holder invention, as well as the advantages thereofover existing prior art, which will become apparent from the descriptionto follow, are accomplished by the improvements described in thisspecification and hereinafter described in the following detaileddescription which fully discloses the invention, but should not beconsidered as placing limitations thereon.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated herein and form a partof the specification, illustrate some, but not the only or exclusive,examples of embodiments and/or features of the lens holder inventionherein. It is intended that the embodiments and figures disclosed hereinare to be considered in all cases illustrative, rather than limiting.

In the drawings:

FIG. 1 shows an exploded view of a pair of sunglasses having asunglasses frame; a lens holder configured to nest within a firstaperture associated with the sunglasses frame; and a lens configured forinsertion within a second aperture associated with the lens holder. Thelens, lens holder, and frame combine to form the sunglasses. In thisregard, the lens can be easily changed, and the lens holder can bechanged to optionally accommodate style changes. Also optional is foamattached at a rear side of the lens holder configured to touch the bodyof a wearer.

FIG. 1A depicts the device as in FIG. 1, showing the preferred width W1of the front surface portion which contacts the lens frame on thesurface opposite that which faces the wearer.

FIG. 2 shows a rear view of the device of FIG. 1 assembled, and depictsan enlarged view of the rear surface portion which contacts the frame onan opposite side from that of the front surface portion shown in FIG.1A.

FIG. 2A shows a rear side of the lens holder device herein also showinga bridge or nose pad optionally formed as part of the lens holder body.

FIG. 3 shows a front side of the lens holder device herein in a frontperspective view and showing a exterior circumferential surface formedaround the lens holder device in a gap formed between the front surfaceportion and rear surface portion.

FIG. 4 shows a front side of the lens holder device herein, showing thefront surface portion projecting from the lens holder body in adirection away from the lens opening surrounded by the lens holder body.

FIG. 5 shows an end view of the lens holder device herein showing thefront surface portion projecting to a distal end across the gap from therear surface portion projecting to a respective distal end thereof.

FIGS. 6 and 7 show top and bottom views of the lens holder deviceherein.

FIG. 8 shows a rear plan view of the lens holder device herein showingthe rear surface portion projecting to a distal end thereof and the lensopening formed within the body of the lens holder device.

FIG. 9 shows a sectional view of the body of the lens holder deviceherein showing the rear surface portion projecting to a distal endthereof across the gap from the front surface portion.

FIG. 10 shows a front view of the lens holder device depicting the pathfrom which the cross section of FIG. 9 was taken.

FIG. 11 shows the lens holder device having a body having a framechannel formed in the gap between the wider W2 rear surface portion andthe narrower W1 front surface portion and showing a recess formed intothe circumference of the lens engagement opening adapted to hold thecircumferential edge of a lens therein.

FIG. 12 depicts the unexpected finding of increased resistance toimpacts to the lens which prevents dismounting of the lens from theframe, where the front surface portion undergoes a deformation from theforce of an impact and stretches and/or may curl slightly away from theframe in a shock absorbing deformation absorbing some of the force ofthe impact and preventing lens dismounting from the lens holder deviceand frame.

FIG. 13 shows a mode of the metal frame and polymeric temples employablewith the components and configurations of the device in FIGS. 1-12, butwith the polymeric temples engaged to a metal alloy frame, both of whichhave a calculated flexure, and hardness to yield a more comfortable andsecure fit on the multiple dimensions of the heads of users.

FIG. 14 shows a top view of the temples operatively engaged with themetal frame of the metal alloy with both having a hardness andelasticity modulus and flexure which combine in a symbiotic combinationallowing for the most comfortable secure fit, impact resistance, whilepreventing dismount of the lenses from the frame.

Other aspects of the disclosed lens holder device herein will be morereadily understood when considered in conjunction with the accompanyingdrawings, and the following detailed description, neither of whichshould be considered limiting.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

This device 10 herein has a lens body 11 formed of elastic materialwhich is adapted within a lens holding opening 12 to circumferentiallyengage around the exterior circumference 14 of a lens 16, to operativelyhold the lens 16, within a formed lens opening 12 within the body 11 ofthe device 10. The body 11 of the lens mounting device 10 is configuredwith a circumferential edge 18 opposite the surface of the opening 12for the lens 16, to engage with a lens aperture 20 formed in an eyeglassframe 22 such as a thin metal frame. So configured, the device 10 allowsusers of metal sunglass frames the ability to easily change their lenses16 without having to return them to the factory, while providing themthe confidence that the lens 16 engaged with the lens mounting device 10herein, will not easily dismount when struck by a projectile 24 such asshown in FIG. 12.

Shown in FIG. 1, is an exploded view of eyewear such as sunglasseshaving a sunglasses frame 22 to which the lens holder device 10interfaces between a lens 16 and the lens apertures 20 of the frame 22.As shown, the body 11 of the device 10 is configured to nest withineither lens aperture 20 associated with the eyewear frame 22. The body11 of the device 10 is configured on a surrounding side edge of the lensopening 12 to operatively engage with and around the exteriorcircumference 18 of a lens 16 to be mounted in the lens aperture 20 ofthe frame 22.

As can be seen in FIGS. 1 and 1A, a front surface portion 26 extends toa distal edge thereof from a first end engaged with the body 11 of thedevice 10. This front surface portion 26 is positioned across a gap fromthe rear surface portions 28 which projects from the body 11 a widthdistance to a distal edge of the rear surface portion 28. Thiscircumferential edge 18 of the body 11 is positioned within the gapwhich has a width defined by the distance between the front surfaceportion 26 and rear surface portion 28.

As noted, in all modes of the device 10 herein, and as shown in FIGS. 1,1A, and FIG. 11, the width W1 of the front surface portion 26 from thefirst end thereof engaged to the body 11 to the distal edge of the frontsurface portion 26, is shorter than a width W2 of the rear surfaceportion 28 which is positioned across a gap defined by thecircumferential edge 18 of the body 11, and extends from the body 11 tothe distal edge of the rear surface portion 28.

In all modes of the device 10 herein, the width W1 of the front surfaceportion 26 worked to allow the required deformation and thereby increaseshock absorption from projectiles 24 (FIG. 12) where the width W1 of thefront surface portion 26 was in a first ratio, where W1 is between 20 to90 percent of the width W2 of the rear surface portion 28. Consequently,eyewear frames 22 using the device 10 herein where the widths are inthis range all yield an enhanced resistance to lens 16 dismount.

While this first range provided an enhanced resistance to dismounting ofthe held lens 16 as noted, a second range of the width W1 of 30-80percent of the width W2, provided a more enhanced resistance to lens 16dismount, and third range of W1 being 40 to 70 percent of the width ofW2 of the rear surface portion 28, provided a maximum resistance to lensdismount, and would be employed where the eyewear is likely to encounterhigher speed projectiles 24 (FIG. 12). However, employment of a lensmount device 10 having a body 11 with front surface portion 26 with awidth W1 being narrower or smaller than a width W2 of a rear surfaceportion 28, in all ranges noted above, did yield an enhancement ofresistance to lens 16 dismount from a configuration where the widthswere equal or where the width W1 was larger than the width W2 of therear surface portion 28. Consequently, in all modes of the device 10herein, it is preferred that the width W1 of the front surface portion26 is exceeded by a width W2 of a rear surface portion 28, in order toachieve the above noted shock absorption and dismount resistance.

Further, all modes of the device 10 herein, as noted, can enhance thisshock absorption provided by the smaller front surface portion width W1,by employment of an elastic material to form the body 11, such as TPEEwith a durometer in a range on the D-scale between 40-90 shore. Thisrange allowed for reasonably easy engagement and disengagement ofsurrounded lenses 16 to the frame 22 and provided the enhancedresistance to projectile-caused dismounting where the body 11 of thelens holder device 10 is formed with the width W1 of the front surfaceportion 26 being narrower with than that of the width W2 of the rearsurface portion 28. Where the eyewear is going to be used with thepossibility of high speed projectile impact such as riding on amotorcycle or in combat or training, a D-scale durometer between 60-70shore was found to enhance the lens 16 dismounting resistance providedby the device 10 and still allow for easy user changing of lenses.Consequently, this durometer shore range can be employed where theeyewear is to be used in areas with higher speed projectiles. Where theeyewear frame 22 is formed of metal such as from a group includingaluminum and titanium, the device 10 herein works especially well theprevent lens 16 dismount by allowing for the deformation of the frontsurface portion 26 as noted herein.

Shown in FIG. 2, is a rear view of the device 10 herein shown in FIG. 1,but assembled. As depicted, there is shown an enlarged view of the rearsurface portion 28 which contacts the frame 22 on an opposite sidethereof from that of the front surface portion 26 shown in FIG. 1A.

A single device 10, is shown in FIG. 2A ready for engagement around alens 16 which will contact and operatively engage with the surface ofthe lens opening 12. A recess 13 may be formed into the surface definingthe circumference of the lens opening 12 to engage around thecircumferential edge 18 of a lens 20.

Shown in FIG. 3 shows a front side of the lens holder device 10 hereinin a front perspective view opposite the view of FIG. 2A. As can beseen, the exterior circumferential surface 12 formed around the exteriorof the body 11 of the lens holder device 10 is positioned in a gap 19formed between the front surface portion 26 and the rear surface portion28. The width of this gap 19 may be adjusted to match the width of theframe 22 to which the body 11 of the device 11 engages to hold a lens 16in place.

FIG. 4 through FIG. 8 depict various views of the lens holder device 10herein disclosed. As shown, the body 11 forming the device 10 in allmodes has a rear surface portion 28 with a width W2 exceeding that ofthe front surface portion 26. A circumferential edge 18 of the body 11is positioned within a gap 19 between the front surface portion 26 andrear surface portion 28, and is sized to contact against the surfacedefining the lens aperture 20 in an eyeglass frame 22. As noted, thisformation allows the front surface portion 26 to undergo a deformationto absorb force of an impact of a projectile 24 (FIG. 12). Bydeformation is meant that the front surface portion 26 stretches,flexes, or curls away from contact with the eyeglass frame 16 at isperimeter edge, as shown in FIG. 12. Such a deformation occurs upon animpact to the lens 16 by a projectile 24 and thereby defines a shockabsorber which dissipates the force preventing it from dismounting thelens 16 from the lens opening 12 and any recess 13 therein.

Additional views of the device 10 are shown in the sectional and otherviews shown in FIGS. 9-11. As depicted for clarity of understanding, thebody 11 of the lens holding device 10 shown in FIG. 10 is shown insectional views in FIGS. 9 and 11.

In FIG. 9 can be seen the width of the rear surface portion 28 beingsignificantly wider than that of the front surface portion 26. Alsoshown are the circumferential edge 18 around the body 11 within the gap19 between the front surface portion 26 and rear surface portion 28.Additionally shown in FIG. 11 in an enlarged view of a portion of thesectional view of FIG. 9 is the width W2 of the rear surface portionbeing larger than the width W1 of the front surface portion, and anenlarged view of the circumferential edge 18 of the body 11 of thedevice 10, positioned in the gap 19 formed between the front surfaceportion 26 and rear surface portion 28.

As also can be seen, the front surface portion 26 projects from a firstend engaged to and formed in a unitary structure with the body 11 of thedevice 10, to a distal edge 27 the defined width W1. Further shown isthe rear surface portion 28 projecting from a first end engaged to andformed as a unitary structure with the body 11 of the device, to adistal edge 29 thereof for the width W2. Further shown for clarity is aportion of the lens opening 12 defined within the body 11 and the recess13 which may be formed therein to aid in holding the lens 16.

Shown in FIG. 12, is a depiction of the deformation of the front surfaceportion 26 which dissipates the force from the shock absorber defined byforming the width W1 of the front surface portion 26, smaller or lessthan a width W2 of the rear surface portion 28 of the body 11 of thedevice 10. While counterintuitive as noted, it was found that the lens16 was held better from dismounting from the lens opening 12 of thedevice 10, where this front surface portion 26 width W1 was shorter ornarrower than that of the rear surface portion W2. This is because uponimpact of a projectile 24 with the lens 16, the force communicated tothe lens 16 is first communicated from the lens 16 to the body 11 of thedevice 10 and then to the circumferential edge 18. The formation of theshorter width W1 of the first projecting portion 26 allows for adeformation of the first projecting portion 26 to dissipate the force ofthe impact. By deformation is meant one or a combination of stretchingof the material forming the projecting portion 26 or a curling ormovement of perimeter portions of the projecting portion 26, away fromthe frame 22. Upon dissipation of some or all of the force of the impactby such a deformation, the projecting portion 26 moves back in positionin contact against the frame 22 surface.

This deformation by the stretching and curling of the front surfaceportion 26, dissipates sufficient force from the impact of theprojectile 24 with the lens 16, to maintain the lens within the lensopening 12, and preventing dismount therefrom which occurred when thefront surface portion 26 was substantially equal to or larger in widthW1 than the rear surface portion W2. Consequently, in all modes of thedevice 10 herein, this configuration and ratio of the width W1 beingsmaller than the width W2 is preferred.

Shown in FIG. 13 is a mode of the device 10 formed of a metal allowframe 22 in combination with polymeric temples 31 which have respectiveindividual characteristics which combine on the formed device 10 toyield the most comfortable eyewear frame 22 on the widest number ofusers having differing head sizes.

As shown, the metal frame 22 formed of the alloy and in the thicknessesnoted above, is used with any of the lenses 16 and lens bodies 11 andother components and configurations of the device in FIGS. 1-12.However, as noted above, after extensive testing of differing materialsfor both the temples 31 and the alloy frame 22, a preferred combinationof a metal frame 22 formed of the metal alloy noted above, with thepolymeric material in the temples 31 noted above, solved the discomfortproblems associated with the device 10 when used with users with varyingsized heads and eye separation.

Shown in FIG. 14, the frame 22 is formed in the even thickness rangenoted above from the first end to the second end of the frame 22. Formedin the thickness of an aluminum alloy material 6061 or 7075, with atempered hardness in a range between T4-T9 the frame will flex F1 duringuse slightly while still maintaining a hold on the lenses 16. Thetemples 31 are operatively engaged with the metal frame 22 with a hinge.As noted it is important for the best and most comfortable fit yieldingthe impact resistance and stability of lens mount, to have the metalallow with a hardness and elasticity modulus and flexure F1 noted above,in combination with the temple 31 formed of the polymeric materialhaving flexure F2 of the material noted above, to yield a combination ofmetal frame with polymeric temples having the most comfortable securefit for a wide variety of user head sizes, as well as maintaining theincreased impact resistance provided by the lens body 11 holding thelens 16 within a lens aperture 20. The combination or product of theforce and flex of F1 with F2 yields a biasing force F3 of the inside ofthe temples 31 against the sides of the face of the user which has beenfound to be significantly enhanced for comfort. As such, the above notedalloy materials for the frame 22 in combination with the specifictemples 31 formed of the above noted material in the above notedthickness range and length, is preferred as the combination was shownduring extensive testing to yield the best results for comfortablesecure eyewear for the broadest number of users with differing headdimensions.

While all of the fundamental characteristics and features of thedisclosed lens mounting device herein have been shown and describedherein, with reference to particular embodiments thereof, a latitude ofmodification, various changes and substitutions are intended in theforegoing disclosure and it will be apparent that in some instances,some features of the invention may be employed without a correspondinguse of other features without departing from the scope of the inventionas set forth. It should also be understood that various substitutions,modifications, and variations may be made by those skilled in the artwithout departing from the spirit or scope of the invention.Consequently, all such modifications and variations and substitutionsare included within the scope of the invention as defined by thefollowing claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. An eyewear frame having a metal alloy frameoperatively engaged to polymeric temples, as shown and described.